“From the start,” President
Barack Obama said of the Islamic State (aka ISIS and ISIL), “our goal has been
first to contain, and we have contained them.” That was on Nov. 12, 2015. A day
later, the terror superpower launched a series of attacks across Paris, killing
130 people. Three weeks later, a jihadist couple – described by ISIS as
“martyrs” and “supporters” – massacred 14 Americans in San Bernardino, Calif.
As Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. James Dunford bluntly concluded last month, “We
have not contained ISIL.”

In fact, since October, ISIS
has been responsible for 525 murders in six countries outside its self-styled caliphate spanning Iraq
and Syria. The Paris siege (130 killed) followed a bombing in Ankara (102
killed), the takedown of a Russian airliner over the Sinai (224 killed) and the
bombing of a Beirut market (43 killed). After Paris came the bombing of a bus
in Tunis (12 killed) and then the San Bernardino massacre (14 killed).

Moreover, ISIS continues to
hold 26,000 square-miles of territory and operate a quasi-government centered
around Racca, in north-central Syria. It commands, controls and inspires forces
in the field from Syria to the Sinai to San Bernardino. It threatens U.S.
allies in Iraq, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel, and attracts
footsoldiers to its death creed. In fact, the number of foreigner fighters
aligned with ISIS in Iraq and Syria has doubled in the past 18 months, with as many as 31,000 people from 86
countries now fighting under the ISIS banner.

Calling ISIS “the most
immediate threat to U.S. national interests,” Defense Secretary Ashton Carter
emphatically concludes, “We’re at war.” The FBI has 900 ISIS-related
investigations underway in all 50 states. According to The New York Times, ISIS
has “manufactured rudimentary chemical warfare shells” and is aggressively
pursuing a chemical-weapons capability.

Add it all up, and ISIS is
arguably stronger now than al-Qaida was in September 2001.

Even though the American people
and the president would like to “turn the page” on more than a decade
of war, that’s simply not an option because, as Gen. Jim Mattis explains, “No
war is over until the enemy says it’s over.”

However, we can prosecute this
war more effectively. “Airpower needs to be applied like a thunderstorm, and so
far we’ve only witnessed a drizzle,” explains Gen. David Deptula, who led the
initial air campaign in Afghanistan. He argues that “excessive procedures … are
handing our adversary an advantage.”

The numbers amplify his point.

Fifteen months into the
anti-ISIS air campaign, 75 percent of warplanes were still returning to base without releasing
their weapons. The average number of strike sorties per day against ISIS is 11, with an average of
43 weapons releases per day.

By way of comparison, Russian
officials report that their air force – not known for power projection since
the collapse of the Soviet Union – launched 2,300
missions over Syria in a 48-day span. That translates into about 47 per
day. And in late 2014, the decrepit Syrian air force conducted 210 airstrikes in the span of 36 hours. To be sure, quality and precision are
often more important than quantity when applying kinetic force, but there are
benefits to quantity, as Americans know from previous air campaigns.

• The average number of strike
sorties per day in the early phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom was 596, with
1,039 weapons releases per day. Saddam Hussein’s regime collapsed in 20 days.

• The average number of strike
sorties per day in the early phases of the post-9/11 Afghanistan campaign was
86, with 230 weapons releases per day. The Taliban regime was swept from Kabul
in five weeks.

• The average number of strike
sorties per day during the Kosovo War was 183, with 364 weapons releases per
day. Slobodan Milosevic withdrew his troops from Kosovo and sued for peace
after 78 days.

• The average number of strike
sorties per day in the Gulf War was 976, with an average of 6,163 weapons
releases per day. The Iraqi military – at the time one of the largest armies in
the world – was routed and in full retreat after just 42 days.

In short, contrary to Obama’s
contention that the choice is between either the current approach or being
“drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria,” there is
a tried-and-true method for taking apart ISIS. It would rely on U.S. joint
tactical air controllers (JTACs) on the ground to identify targets and guide
ordnance onto the enemy, and feature high-tempo, high-yield airstrikes from
multiple directions and multiple platforms striking across the enemy’s entire
strategic depth. It would also coordinate closely with indigenous friendly
forces on the ground.

With “optimal use of air
power,” Deptula contends, “The
Islamic State can be decomposed through a comprehensive and robust air campaign
designed to: (1) terminate its expansion, (2) paralyze and isolate its
command-and-control capability, (3) undermine its ability to control the
territory it occupies, and (4) eliminate its ability to export ¬terror.”

The president doesn’t deserve
all the blame for what Col. Kenneth Allard, former dean of the National War
College, calls “18 months of … part-time bombing.” Where is Congress? It has
been talking about passing an authorization for military force for more than a
year, and still the troops and the nation wait. That is an abdication of
Congress’ co-equal wartime responsibilities.

Perhaps this should be
expected. After all, in a time of war, Congress, which controls the purse
strings, has allowed defense spending to fall from 4.7 percent of GDP in 2009
to 3.1 percent today. Pressed by sequestration, the Air Force announced plans
in 2014 to eliminate 500 planes. The
Navy fleet numbers 284 ships, but combatant commanders say they need 450 ships. The
Army’s active-duty endstrength has been cut from a post-9/11 high of 570,000
soldiers, to 490,000 today. Marine Corps endstrength will fall to 182,000 by
2017 (from 202,000).

On the attack

It has been said the difference
between al-Qaida and ISIS is that al-Qaida “recruited on the basis of the defensive slogan
of martyrdom, ‘Islam is under attack.’ But ISIS is recruiting on the basis of
‘Islam is on the attack.’”

To counter the myth that Islam
is under attack, U.S. policymakers must hammer home the facts. No matter what
the jihadists say – no matter what the confused peoples of the postmodern West
have been taught in school or told by the media – Islam is not under attack and
the United States is not at war with Islam. After all, in the past
quarter-century, the United States has defended Muslim Saudi Arabia, freed
Muslim Kuwait and rescued Muslim Kurdistan. It has fed Muslim Somalia, ended
the bludgeoning of Muslims in Bosnia, protected Muslims in Kosovo, and freed
Muslim Afghanistan, Muslim Iraq and Muslim Libya from horrific regimes. U.S.
troops have bled and died with Kurds, Kuwaitis, Saudis, Iraqis and Afghanis –
Muslims all. The U.S. military, which includes thousands of Muslims, has
shielded Sunnis from Shiites and Shiites from Sunnis, rushed aid to Muslim
Indonesia and Muslim Pakistan after natural disasters of biblical proportion,
and cleared a pathway back to civilization for Iraq and Afghanistan.

If this record doesn’t convince
Muslim-majority nations that the United States is not at war with Islam, that
Islam is not under attack, what will?

As President Obama observes,
with understandable exasperation, “The United States is chastised for meddling
in the region, accused of having a hand in all manner of conspiracy. At the
same time, the United States is blamed for failing to do enough to solve the
region’s problems and for showing indifference toward suffering Muslim
populations.”

To counter the message that
ISIS is on the attack and its ultimate victory is inevitable, Bakr al-Baghdadi
and his henchmen must be utterly destroyed – not contained. To achieve that
end, policymakers first must equip America’s military with the tools necessary
to wage and win America’s wars (see above), and then they must unshackle
America’s military.

Until and unless that happens,
ISIS will continue to attract followers, massacre civilians, sow chaos, murder
Americans and threaten U.S. interests. But if and when that happens – if and
when the U.S. military is cleared to go on the attack – ISIS will go the way of
bin Laden and Zarqawi, the Taliban tyranny and Saddam’s regime, Hitler and the
Nazis, Yamamoto and the kamikazes.